Few pills and a roach should never count as “a car full of drugs”. That should be reserved for at least several pounds of contraband.
I can’t count how many times I had other people’s pills on me, whether for anxiety/panic or pain or sleep. I guess in the Land of the Free I’d count as a career criminal.
Shame on her - it’s not as if cops would ever shine bright lights in peoples eyes!
I’ve never risen above it. It’s never been my goal to rise above it. I’m deep down in it. I swim in it. I will ridicule people who make fun of others for not fitting in the norm.
Other than this being a normal drug bust that happens hundreds of times a day (thousands?) why was that lovely woman’s picture posted here? Though nothing was said, I think it’s clear to anyone being honest with themselves that this account was posted because someone thinks she looks odd enough to post a pic so that they can show everyone this person whom they perceive as different. That’s me, down in it where I belong. I like it here. It’s not nice but it’s where I wanna be… defending the idea that different is more beautiful than sameness.
Hardly the same thing.
Pointing out that a post seems to be signaling someone out for being different is not the same as signaling someone out because they’re different.
In this particular post, if the person were a Happy Mutant and posting pictures of herself because she was proud to be different, Mark could have been posting pictures of a proud Happy Mutant. In this case, though, this is a photo that wasn’t deliberately made public by the subject, of someone down on their luck. With no other text by Mark, it’s hard to say it’s anything other than signaling someone out for being different.
On the other hand, the woman is kind of smiling, so I guess we can give Mark the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s just posting a proud Happy Mutant.
Did she work at Starbucks?
Should it be legal to spark up while you’re driving?
She was apparently smoking while driving. So yeah I’m sure the car reeked. She should get a DUI/DWI for sure, but not possession (since it should be legal), but I’m sure she’ll be charged with several crimes. Hopefully they aren’t harsher on her than they would be a straight-laced white man or woman, but I doubt that.
The first thing that occurred to me when I saw the caption was the two women who were killed a few weeks ago in a Florida women’s prison near Ocala (also the site of this story) after at least one of them had reported being threatened by guards there.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article2564576.html
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/article2686194.html
That makes four women this year who died there in custody. There are reports of a power struggle between groups of corrections officers there that is supposedly the cause of at least one of the deaths.
While I have no reason to believe that she’ll end up doing time in the state facility there, the word “Ocala” caught my attention even more than the photo of her facial jewelry.
I drive stoned every day without problems. It’s a car not a fucking fighter jet.
Old people with poor vision driving SUVs: OK.
People driving while tired or on prescription meds: Not particularly punishable (and certainly less bad in the eyes of the law)
People driving stoned, despite the fact that data suggests it’s less dangerous than driving after drinking to the legal limit: DIE YOU DEVIL SPAWN FROM THE DEPTHS OF HELL!
Go fuck your social norms.
Why not both! She can be arrested for being black and pierced!
I don’t know Mark’s intent, but I immediately thought of her as “our kind of happy mutant” - she’s pretty awesome. I think her piercings are gorgeous - I really like the nose ring with the cross.
But, I think we’re all kind of not sure what point is trying to be made here, whether, “hey, look at this bad ass!” or “hey, look at this idiot.” But I’d guess the former rather than the latter?
Me too. I’d choose a different symbol for my septum but it’s a neat look and I’m going to try something similar next time I dress up.
Her forehead and nose-bridge work is particularly good. Very pleasing symmetry there.
Oh man, that’s gross. You gotta fumigate after THAT.
I’m digging it!
it sucks that I cant click “like” more than once.
Citation please.
Also, if you can’t pass a vision test at the DMV or “drink to the legal limit” every day before getting in a car I’d prefer not to have you on my roads either. The idea is to be the safest driver possible, not to purposely push yourself to the outmost margins of driving competence.
Your car may not be a fighter jet, but cars kill one hell of a lot more people than fighter jets.
I’ve given this citation countless times before on this very blog. You’ll have to take my word for it or read this book which is fully indexed with references and includes two studies of crash data that unequivocally support my claim http://www.amazon.com/Marijuana-Safer-Driving-People-Edition/dp/1603585109
Or not believe me, I don’t care.
Vision test? My eyes are fine. I get 5:1 ratios in call of duty… while stoned. “drink to the legal limit”? Your preferences don’t matter because that behaviour is already allowed by law. Suck it up.
cars kill one hell of a lot more people than fighter jets.
Not my car… mostly cars being driven by drunks.
The same has been true of every car that was ever involved in a fatal DUI. Until it wasn’t.
Your source suggests driving while stoned is safER than driving while drunk, not that driving while stoned is safe. Purposely impairing your ability to drive safely is a dick move.
Test that assumption. Certain flight sims, for example, or racing games, can be pretty sensitive to reaction/attention deterioration. Test with sober (baseline, known-good), alcohol-impaired (to make sure the sim really shows deterioration of performance, a known-bad test), and stoned to different degrees. In various orders, to control for the performance increase by repeating the game. To make things yet more interesting, try adding fatigue as another parameter.
Subjective guesses can be somewhat perilous. Check them out to see to which degree you’re right.
On TFX (that ancient sim when 320x200/256 colors was a standard gaming res) I noticed effects of some meds on reaction speed (some maneuvers that I did routinely before suddenly kept ending with crashes), and also effects of music on performance (could be an interesting study to compare aggressive fast-paced music vs laid-back classical one; for high-intensity dogfights Laibach was better than Bach, and the effect was surprisingly pronounced).
I didn’t say it’s to “drive safely” I said it’s “possible to drive safely” while stoned. I like my rules based on objective evidence and facts, not some bullshit crap driven by a hundred years and billions of dollars of your tax money.
My source says no such thing, but feel free to presume you understand the contents of the book by looking at the cover.
The source says this: society accepts that there’s a level of impairment at which the increased dangers are acceptable. If law says it’s acceptable to behave in manner A, and manner B is less risky then manner A, then I’m not going to take this double standard bullshit for anyone.
Show me it’s more risky. If it’s not I expect to see you complaining next that it’s unacceptable to drink a beer and drive. Otherwise you’re just joining society in being a scaremongering hypocrite who expects others to accept rules based on nothing but propaganda.
